Dynamics of Polygons

Site Map

Chronology

PDFs

Animations

Software

Manipulates

Images

Links

e-mail: mail@dynamicsofpolygons.org

The web of the regular pentagon (N = 5)

The web of the regular octagon ( N = 8)

Three nested projections for N = 8 showing generations 3,4 and 5.

The inner web for N = 11

The First Family for N = 11. The region of interest lies between two regular 22-gons known as S1 and S2.

Compass and straightedge construction for the regular heptadecagon (N= 17)

A P5 projection for N= 17

A Penrose kite which can be flown using Cantor string.

Billiards inside a regular pentagon

Trailing edges for the regular triangle in magenta and the inverse image of these edges in blue. So blue maps to magenta under τ.

The web for the regular triangle

The web for a non-regular triangle is affinely equivalent to the web for a regular triangle.

The web for an ‘elliptical’ pentagon is affinely equivalent to the web for the regular case – which is shown at the top of the page.

A Young Hare by Albrecht Dürer - 1502

The web for the regular heptagon on the left compared to the Dürer heptagon on the right.

Step-1 orbit of S1 center. It is period 7. The remaining points in S1 take two circuits around M, so they are period 14.

A region above S1 for N = 7 showing the break-down of self-similar structure.

8 Generations of M’s for N = 7
Generation	Period	Ratio
M[1]	28
M[2]	98	3.5
M[3]	2212	22.57
M[4]	17486	7.905
M[5]	433468	24.789
M[6]	3482794	8.0347
M[7]	86639924	24.876
M[8]	696527902	8.0393

4k + 1 primes	4k + 3 primes
5	7
13	11
17	19
29	23
37	31
41	43

6 Generations of M’s for N = 13
Generation	Period	Ratio
M[1]	130
M[2]	2366	18.200
M[3]	32578	13.769
M[4]	456638	14.017
M[5]	6392386	13.998
M[6]	89493950	14.000

The First Family for N = 17 showing M on the right and D on the left. There are 17 such D’s surrounding M.

P2 projection of the S[1] center in

ring 2 for N = 17

Disquisitiones Arithmeticae

By C. F. Gauss – 1801

C.F. Gauss (1777-1855)

Neils Able (1802−1829)

Evariste Galois 1811−1832)

A period 12 orbit for N = 6

A P5 projection for N = 16

This is a non-profit site devoted to the history and dynamics of convex polygons. We will define the dynamical structure of a polygon using repeated reflections about the vertices as shown in the two examples below. This is called the ‘outer billiards’ map tau. (The definition is given below.) There are other maps which yield a similar structure. (See Chronology or Digital Filters for an overview of a wide range of related mappings which occur in electrical circuits, celestial mechanics, complex analysis and quantum mechanics.)

If the edges of a regular N-gon are extended until they meet, the result is called a 'star polygon'. For the regular pentagon (N = 5) and octagon (N = 8) shown here, these extended edges have been repeatedly mapped under the inverse of tau to generate the black web-like regions. These webs W are called 'singularity' sets because by definition tau is not defined on any point in W. This means that tau is always defined on the complement of W as shown by the examples here. These white regions in the complement of W are called 'tiles'. For N = 5 and N = 8 these tiles exist on all scales - as can be seen by clicking on the pentagon image in the left panel.

The web W reveals geometric and algebraic structure which is inherent in the polygon and every regular N-gon has its own unique web. The webs for N = 3 and N = 4 are not very interesting because the 'algebraic complexity' of N = 3 and N = 4 is 1 - while the algebraic complexity of N = 5 and N = 8 is 2. The algebraic complexity of a regular N-gon is defined to be Phi[N]/2 where Phi[N] is the Euler totient function - which enumerates all the integers less than N which are relatively prime with N. So to find Phi[8] check which of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 have no factors in common with 8 and the answer is just {1,3,5,7}. For N >2, this number will always be even and we reduce it by half because of symmetry.  The only N-gons with 'quadratic' complexity 2 are N = {5,8,10,12} and in each case W is a fractal image which is self-similar on all scales. For N-gons with complexity greater than 2, it is likely that W will be multi-fractal with an infinite spectrum of dimensions. A recent paper summarizes what is known about the dynamics and geometry for regular polygons. It will be at the Cornell University arxiv site but it is also available here under the link to PDFs at FirstFamilies &Mutations

Aside from a few simple cases, very little is known about the dynamics or singularity set W of a regular polygon. The regular heptagon N = 7 has 'cubic' complexity 3 so the vertices  cannot be specified algebraically without a cubic equation and the regular 11-gon requires a quintic. In both cases the resulting dynamics are very complex.

At the top of this page are two ‘density’ plots showing the small-scale dynamics of the regular 11-gon. (Click on any image to see a larger image or go to Images to choose from thumbnails.) These two plots are based on the same data which is the ‘winding number’ of each point in the grid. The ‘winding number’ of a point is a measure of the average rotation per iteration. For example the points in S1 shown below get their name from their ‘Step-1’ periodic orbit which advances just one vertex on each iteration, so the winding number is ω = 1/11. This is the smallest possible winding number for N = 11. In the 3D plot above, S1 cannot be seen because it is in a deep hole at the upper left. The colored plot is from the opposite perspective and S1 is in the foreground colored deep red. The dark blue strip is the ‘shock wave’ that occurs when the sphere of influence of S1 meets that of S2.

The points in the thin hexagonal ‘skating rink’ are also periodic so they have constant winding number. The period is 169·2 and ω = 41/169. The neighboring dynamics are very complex and the skating rink is bordered by a multi-fractal landscape of immense complexity. This plot is 1000 by 1000 and each point is iterated for 3000 iterations to estimate the winding numbers, but there are still many regions which are poorly resolved.

N = 11 and N = 22 have the same 'quintic' complexity because doubling the vertices of a odd N-gon is a trivial operation that does not increase the algebraic complexity. See Constructions of Regular Polygons. This is no longer true for even N-gons, so N = 24 has algebraic complexity 4 which is twice that of N = 12.  In the plots below N = 11 is shown embedded in the web of N = 22. The web of N = 11 can be done separately but there would be no difference. The blue and black regions are invariant under tau. Here we are interested in the region local to N = 11 at the red arrow. The First Family members of N = 11 are numbered consecutively from S1 to S5, and the most important tiles are S1 and S2 adjacent to N = 11 as shown here and at the top of the page. The edges of odd N-gons appear to have dynamics which are more complex than any region in the overall web W and the blue region here adjacent to N = 22 is better behaved. 

We may never know the limiting small-scale structure for the regular 11-gon because the geometric complexity tends to increase with each new ‘generation’. The plots above resolve only the first 3 or 4 generations. N = 11 has four linearly independent scales which act across generations, so a 6^th generation polygon could have radius Scale[3]²·Scale[5]³/Scale[2]. This type of interaction is well documented with the regular heptagon (N = 7) where just two non-trivial scales guarantees a diversity of dynamics beyond that of a simple fractal structure. The First Family tiles are always part of this structure - but there are regions for N = 7 and N = 11 where all the canonical structure breaks down and the dynamics become unpredictable. The theory of multi-fractals provides some insight, but after years of investigations, there has been only minor progress in resolving the small-scale dynamics of N = 7 much less N = 11. More than brute force is needed because computational issues show up very early. For N = 11, the overall scale for each new generation is Scale[5] ≈ 0.0422171162 so after 6 generations the dynamics are on the scale of 5.66·10^-9 and the 25^th generation is smaller than the Plank scale of 1.6·10^-35 m. See Winding Numbers, N11Summary and N7Summary. To see what the small-scale geometry looks like in the region adjacent to S2 click on this image with shows two tiles in the First Family of S2 and an 'offspring' called Sx. Since the First Family tiles of S2 are by definition part of the 2nd generation, Sx would be a tile in the 3rd generation. For more detail of Sx click here. It took billions of iterations over an extended period of time to generate W at this level - but we are developing more efficient algorithms using alternative mappings.

The primary motivation for this site is the hope that someone will provide answers where we have none. The ‘wish’ list below contains some of the major unanswered questions. On balance, what is not known far exceeds what is known. The Site Map gives an overview of the content of these pages and the Chronology is a brief history of this project. Whenever possible we have provided content in Pdf format which the reader can download. The Software link contains Mathematica code which can be downloaded and pasted into any notebook. This is ‘working code’ which is designed to be easily modified or optimized. It should run on any version of Mathematica from 5 to 11. See Algorithms.

The Animation link has video animations in multiple formats which can be run or downloaded. There are also manipulates in the new Computable Data Format from Wolfram. These manipulates run from any browser using a free plug-in. Download the plug-in at http://www.wolfram.com/cdf-player and then click on Manipulates link above. For your safety each manipulate will ask for permission to load the Mathematica kernel before running. Right click to see your options. There are other software packages such as Maple and Matlab which would do equally well for investigations of this type. The free Geogebra package is excellent for geometric manipulations.

The Pdf on Constructions of Regular Polygons gives a brief history of attempts to construct regular polygons with compass and straightedge – culminating with the discovery by Carl Friedrich Gauss in 1796 that the regular 17-gon is constructible. This implies that the vertices for the regular 17-gon can be described by nested quadratic equations – even though the minimal equation for these vertices is degree 8. It is still not clear what effect this has on the recursive geometry of the regular 17-gon. In that same Pdf we discuss the issue of what regular polygons are constructible using origami. The Animations folder has four video clips showing the dynamics of the regular 17-gon (also known as the heptadecagon).

The algebraic structure of a regular polygon can be described using Galois theory which yields a nested sequence of extension fields of the rationals. This will be discussed below. Each extension introduces an additional level of complexity. Very little is known about the geometry of these field extensions, but we have found that 4k+1 primes such as 17 have a local recursive structure which appears to be lacking in 4k + 3 cases. In the latest paper discussed above we show that the 4k+1 conjecture appears to follow from the Edge Conjecture - which makes predictions about the evolution of the S[1] and S[2] tiles adjacent to N. In the 4k+1 case, the predicted family of S[2] includes an S[3] tile that apparently can generate 'next-generation' S[1] and S[2] tiles to keep the chain intact. In this case we know both the 'temporal' (dynamical) scaling and the geometric scaling of these sequences so it is possible to calculate the local fractal dimension.  For N = 11 above we can make no such predications and the whole concept of 'generations' may be pointless since the long-term evolution is unknown.

To peer thought these layers of complexity we will sometimes use projections which generate ‘cross-sections’of the orbits. On the left below are 8 cyclic mappings of the vertices for N = 17. Each mapping takes the vertices mod k where k is relatively prime to 17, so there φ(17)/2 = 8 distinct mappings where φ(n) is the Euler totient function which counts the number of positive integers less than or equal to n which are relatively prime to n. (The minimal degree of the polynomial used to define the vertices of a regular n-gon is never higher than φ(n)/2)

Note that each vertex remapping has the form R¹⁷ → R¹⁷ where R is the real numbers . When the maps are applied to a given orbit, they yield 8 projections as shown on the right. These images are all generated from the same orbit. The first image corresponds to the identity mapping, so it tracks the orbit itself. Note that it is confined to the region surrounding the 17-gon. (This region is one of 7 invariant annuli surrounding the 17-gon. These 7 annuli form what we call the inner star region. See the related plots at the bottom of this page.) The other projections are much larger in scope and some of the plots below are thousands of units wide after just 10,000 iterations. The 17-gon would be invisible on these scales. The initial point is q1 ≈ {-0.6716275988, -0.7997683214660}. See Projections and N17Summary.

We urge readers to contribute their software and results so we may be able to reach a consensus on the major issues. It is inconceivable that there are no errors in these pages and we ask for help in finding them and making corrections.

The most patient reader will thank me for compressing so

much nonsense and falsehood into a few lines.

—Edward Gibbon (1737-1794)

In this area of study, proofs are difficult and most of the results obtained so far were motivated by numerical studies. To avoid the pitfalls of making conjectures based on data alone, we ask the readers to compare their results with the data given here.

Non-regular polygons have their own unique structure, but the geometry is very diverse. At this time there is no known classification scheme that can be used to determine the genetic structure for a given polygon, but there are results in special cases. The Penrose kite shown on the left is an example of a non-regular polygon which can generate unbounded orbits when the coordinate q is irrational. See Penrose Summary and N5Kite Summary.

The mapping which generates these structures is called the Tangent map. It is also known as the outer billiards map or the dual billiards map. Classical billiards is played on a rectangle table. In physics, this is called inner billiards because it involves tracking the path of a billiard ball inside a convex polygon such as the pentagon shown at left. In outer billiards the ball is outside the table. There is a form of projective duality between inner and outer billiards, but the strict duality only applies to smooth curves so there is virtually no correlation between an orbit inside a regular pentagon and an orbit outside.

Definition of the Outer-Billiards Map τ : Given a convex polygon with a clockwise (or counter-clockwise) orientation, pick a point p outside the polygon and draw the 'tangent line' (supporting line) in the same orientation as the polygon. Extend the line an equal distance on the other side of the point of contact. The endpoint of this line segment is defined to be τ(p), so τ(p) = − p + 2c where c is the point of contact.

In Euclidean geometry, τ(p) is called the point reflection of p across c. It is more accurately known as the inversion of p with respect to c. Any reflection preserves distance, so τ is a (piecewise) isometry. As a mapping of the plane, it preserves area and this means it can be used to model systems which conserve energy - such as orbital dynamics. Run CDF Orbit Demo.

Given a convex n-gon P with vertices {c₁, c₂,..,c_n} which we assume to be numbered clockwise, the corresponding edges E = {E₁,E₂, ..,E_n} have both a ‘forward’ and ‘trailing’ extension. (Just the trailing extensions are shown below in blue.) Let E^f = E^f_k be the union of the forward extensions and E^t = E^t_k be the union of the trailing extensions. Each extension is assumed to be an open ray.

The map τ is not defined on P or on the trailing edges, so the level-0 web is defined to be W₀ = E E^t. This is the exceptional (or singular) set of τ. Since W₀ is connected, the complement of W₀ external to P consists of n disjoint open (convex) sets which are known as level-0 tiles. These tiles are also called ‘atoms’ because all the subsequent dynamics are determine by repeated action of τ on this level-0 partition of the space external to P. These primitive tiles define the domain of τ relative to each vertex so they can be labeled by the indices 1,2,..n. These labels will be the first elements of the ‘corner sequence’ of a point in these regions. As the web progresses, each level-k tile will have a corner sequence of length k+1.

The union of the level-0 tiles is the domain of τ which is abbreviated Dom(τ). Dom(τ²) is Dom(τ) – τ^-1 (W₀). The union of W₀ and τ^-1 (W₀) is called the level-1 web, W₁. In general the level k (forward) web is defined to be:

(i) W_k = where W₀ = E E^t

The inverse web is defined in a similar fashion using τ and the extended forward edges:

(ii) Wⁱ_k =where Wⁱ₀ = E E^f

At each iteration, W_k and Wⁱ_k partition the plane into disjoint open convex regions which are the level-k tiles. Below is W₁ for the polygon P, showing the level-1 tiles and the corner sequences. On the side bar at left is the web for a regular triangle. Run CDF Web Demo (right click to see options).

The analysis of these corner sequences is part of ‘symbolic dynamics’. For any convex piecewise isometry such as τ, these corner sequences have polynomial complexity and the degree of that polynomial is a common measure of the complexity of the dynamics. The first differences of these corner sequences yields ‘step-sequences’ which in turn can be used to define winding numbers - the average rotation per iteration. When the polygon P is regular, there is much added structure to the limiting web W. This will be discussed below.

An affine transformation T is a linear transformation together with a possible translation so it has the form

T[{x₁,x₂}] = + = Ax + t

where we make no distinction between {e,f} and

The most common affine transformations are rotations, shears and scaling (including negative scalings such as reflections). The Tangent map is an affine transformation so it commutes with any affine transformation T as long as the matrix A is invertible (det(A) not 0). In Hamiltonian (energy-preserving) dynamics, the translation t is called a ‘kick’ or perturbation so the Tangent map is similar to a kicked Hamiltonian where the kicks are dependent on the vertices of the N-gon. Saturn gets a ‘kick’ from each encounter with Jupiter and it is not clear whether these kicks will eventually destabilize Saturn’s orbit. The ‘kicks’ that the Earth feels are not ‘synchronized’ so they are relatively harmless.

The set of invertible affine transformations is called the affine group. We will assume that all affine transformations are in this group. This means that for a polygon P with web W, T(P) will have web T(W). In a sense, all affinely equivalent polygons have the 'same' web and hence the same genetic structure. On the left below is the web for an arbitrary triangle. It is just a distorted version of the web for the regular triangle so the dynamics are unchanged. The same is true for the pentagon.

The regular pentagon is shown here along with 5 affine transformatios

The first transformation in the graphic above is an example of an 'elliptical' affine transformation. The corresponding web is shown in the side-bar at left. In Mathematica:

T = AffineTransform[{{3,0},{0,2}}] (*scale by 3 in x and 2 in y with no translation*)

All affinely regular pentagons will have similar webs, but 'most' transformations are not affine and the webs will be very different. Except for the triangle, any small change in a vertex of a regular polygon will yield a non-affine version with very different dynamics. An affine transformation is a special case of a linear fractional transformation that maps z to (az+b)/(cz+d). (In complex analysis these are called Mobius transformations.) In Mathematica T= LinearFractionalTransform[{a, b, c, d}]; For example

In 1525 the Renaissance artist Albrecht Dürer wrote a book called Underweysung der Messung mit dem Zirckel und Richtscheyt (A Course in the Art of Measurement with Compass and Ruler). The book contains illustrations and directions for the construction of geometrical objects, such as the ‘regular’ heptagon shown here. The construction is very simple – first construct an equilateral triangle and then bisect one side to obtain the sides of the heptagon. In his drawing shown below, just the first edge is shown. If the circle has radius 1, the heptagon will have edge length /2 ≈ .866025 compared to a regular heptagon which has edge length ≈ 0.867767. This was an ancient construction and Dürer knew that it was only approximate, but he did not know that it was impossible to construct a regular heptagon with compass and (unmarked) straightedge. The resulting heptagon looks almost regular, but it is not in the same affine family, so the dynamics are very different. See Polygons of Albrecht Dürer which can be downloaded here or at the Cornell University arxiv site.

As indicated above the case of N = 3 holds few surprises, even when irrational coordinates are allowed, but the non-regular case of N = 4 is surprisingly complex when at least one of the vertices is irrational. A Penrose Kite is a quadrilateral such as the one shown above. In 2007 Richard Schwartz of Brown University showed that there are orbits which diverge.We call polygons in this class 'unstable', so this irrational Penrose Kite is unstable. In 2009 Schwartz generalized this proof to include any irrational q value and he conjectured that ‘most’ polygons are unstable. Our numerical evidence supports this conjecture. There is a summary table below which gives results about an assortment of polygons.There are longer versions in Pdf form which can be accessed via the Site Map or the Pdf folder link above.

In his Wikipedia article on the outer billiards map, Schwartz lists the following as the most important open questions:

(i) Show that outer billiards relative to almost every convex polygon has unbounded orbits.

(ii) Show that outer billiards relative to a regular polygon has almost every orbit periodic. The cases of the equilateral triangle and the square are trivial, and S.Tabachnikov answered this for the regular pentagon.

(iii) More broadly, characterize the structure of the set of periodic orbits relative to the typical convex polygon.

Below is a list of further questions which we hope to answer with the help of the community (or a Deity).

(iv) For a given polygon what are the admissible step sequences ? (This is one for the Deity.)

(v) Which polygons have unbounded orbits ? ( These are called 'unstable' polygons.)

(vi) Why is it true for 4k+ 1 prime N-gons that the D’s and M’s survive the turmoil and why does the ratio of consecutive D (& M) periods approach N + 1?

(vii) Which polygons have structure on all scales ? Are there a well-defined class of non-regular convex polygons with this property ?

(viii) For regular N-gons, does the small-scale complexity tend to increase with each new generation ? Does it increase with N ?

(ix) What is the limiting domain structure for the regular hendecagon,N = 11 ? What is the structure at the Plank scale ? Will we ever be able to take a 3D stroll through the N = 11 landscape in real time ? (In the words of Richard Schwartz “A case such as n = 11 seems beyond the

reach of current technology. The orbit structure seems unbelievably complex.”)

(x) Every regular n-gon has a corresponding number field which is an algebraic extension of the rationals Q. This number field is the cyclotomic field K_n =Q(z) where z is an nth root of unity.To what degree does this field determine the dynamics of the polygon ?

(xi) In the Digital Filter map, it appears that for all odd integers N, the angular parameter θ = 2*Pi/2N 'shadows' the dynamics of the Tangent Map for a regular 2N-gon (and corresponding N -gon). What dynamics are modeled by θ =2*Pi/N ? We know the answer only for N = 5 and N = 7.

The Tangent Map still makes sense in the limiting case when the polygon becomes a convex closed curve as illustrated below. This is the front cover of The Mathematical Intelligencer Volume 1 Number 2 from 1978. This drawing was from a featured article by Jurgen Moser (1929-1999) called "Is The Solar System Stable ?"

Moser presented an historical perspective of the 1963 KAM theorem - named after the three contributors: V.I Arnold, A.N.Kolgomorov and J. Moser. This theorem was a major breakthrough in the question of stability for classical mechanics - which includes the orbital dynamics of the solar system.

Moser's contribution to the KAM Theorem was the Twist Theorem which shows that a 'smooth' Hamiltonian (conservative) system could survive periodic perturbations as long as there were no 'major' resonances such as that found between Jupiter and Saturn. Five orbits of Jupiter are a very close match for two of Saturn and this 5:2 resonance could create instabilities over long time periods. Uranus and Neptune also have a resonance which is nearly 2:1. This leaves open the question of stability for the solar system. See Torus Manipulate.

For a sufficiently smooth 'convex' curve, the Tangent Map becomes a Twist Map in the sense that points tend to follow a simple angular rotation (the twist) - which depends only on the distance from the origin. The mapping below shows some orbits of a perturbed twist map.

Each curve is a different set of initial conditions. Moving away from the origin, the perturbations increase and eventually the system breaks down and points diverge. Even in the 'stable' zone there are 'resonant' rational orbits such as the 6:1 resonance shown here. A planet or asteroid in this region might have a stable orbit if the initial conditions put it inside one of the 'islands', but in between the islands are regions of local instability.

In 1972 J. Moser stated that the Twist Theorem could be used to prove that the Tangent Map for 'smooth' curves is 'stable' in that all orbits are bounded, as long as the curve is sufficiently smooth (6-times continuously differentiable). This was proven by Douady in 1982. A convex polygon is not even 1-times continuously differentiable because derivatives do not exist at the vertices, so the KAM theorem would be expected to fail. Moser raised this question in his 1978 article - "Are there orbits for a convex polygon which diverge under the Tangent Map ? This became known as the Moser-Numann question because B. H. Neumann had earlier stated the problem in the context of outer billiards. This predicted divergence has only recently been confirmed by Richard Schwartz with the Penrose kite.

The Outer-Billiards Map on Regular Polygons

In 1989 F. Vivaldi and A. Shaidenko showed that all orbits for a regular polygon must be bounded. This follows from the fact that the regular polygons have ‘exceptional sets’ (webs) which are symmetric with respect to τ and τ^-1. Above we defined W_k to be the (forward) exceptional set for τ^k , with limiting web W^f and limiting inverse web Wⁱ is defined in a similar fashion by applying τ to the forward edges, and we define W to be the union of these two webs. For a regular polygon the limiting forward web is clearly identical to the limiting inverse web, but they differ on each iteration and it is useful to make the distinction.

Since W is the union of a countable number of lines or line segments, it has zero (Lebsegue) measure so the complement W^c has full measure and τ is defined ‘almost’ everywhere. At every iteration of the web there are unbounded tiles but for regular polygons the limiting tiles have bounded measure and the tiles with this maximal measure are call the D tiles. These D tiles also have the largest number of possible sides which is 2N for N odd and N for N even. (No tile can have more than 2N sides because all iterations of an extended edge are parallel, so there are never more than 2N directions to choose from. For N even, there are just N directions.)

Examples: Below are large-scale webs for the regular heptagon (N = 7) and the regular tetradecagon (N = 14) – showing rings of maximal D tiles. Since the region between rings is invariant, the dynamics are bounded. The region inside the first ring of D’s is called the central ‘star’ region, and this region can serve as ‘template’ for the global dynamics.

We will use the regular heptagon (N = 7) to introduce some of the basic concepts. Below is a ‘vector’ plot of the central ‘star’ region, showing the first ring of D tiles and the associated ‘family’ of related tiles. The central N = 7 is also known as M, so D and M serve as ‘patriarch’ and ‘matriarch’ of this family.

For 'most' N-gons and 'most' initial points, the orbits under τ are periodic. The plot above shows the period 7 orbit of the center of the D tiles. In this vector plot we show just the major ‘resonances’ of the Tangent map – and these constitute the First Family for N = 7. The non-redundant members of this family are shown below:

The three ‘star’ points determine the bounds of the First Family. Star[3] is called GenStar because in some contexts, there are infinite families of tiles converging to this point. D is also called S[3] because the ‘step-sequence’ of its orbit is constant {3}. What this means is that the Tangent map orbit skips 3 vertices on each iteration. This can be seen in the orbit plot above. Likewise the orbit of S1 and S[2], skip 1 and 2 vertices on each iteration – and the centers are also period 7. DS1, DS2 and DS3 are really sub-tiles of D, and their orbits would skip 1,2, and 3 vertices, if they were relative to the star points of D.

Below is this same region showing the detailed web structure – which is very complex. Since φ(7)/2 = 3, N = 7 is classified as a ‘cubic’ polygon – along with N = 9. Typically the algebraic complexity of a regular polygon is directly reflected in the dynamical complexity. The ‘quadratic’ polygons, N = 5,8,10 and 12, all have relatively simple dynamical structure with webs which have a well-defined fractal dimension. For N = 7 and beyond, the web structure is probably multi-fractal.

M and D are called an M-D pair because their dynamics are linked (see below). The D tile shares the same side length as M, but it has 14-sides – so it contains two copies of M. DS[2] and DS[1] above are also an M-D pair – and these pairings continue at well-defined scale reduction – so that they form an infinite sequence converging to GenStar. If these pairs encompassed all the essential dynamics of N = 7, then N = 7 would have a simple fractal structure – just like the ‘quadratic’ polygons. But this is apparently not the case.

Star Points and Scaling for a Regular Polygon

As indicated above, N = 7 does support chains of generations converging to the GenStar point (and an infinite number of related points). These chains begin with M and D which are the initial M[0] and D]0] which are matriarch and patriarch of the 1^st Generation. Likewise M[1] and D[1] will be matriarch and patriarch of the 2^nd generation which is scaled to fit on a single edge of D[0] – as shown above for DS[1] and DS[2]. The scale that would accomplish this is GenScale. The star points and scales of any regular polygons are defined as follows:

Definition: (i) For a regular N-gon the star points are given by  star[k] = +/- hN(s_k,1) where s_k = Tan[kπ/N] for 1 ≤ k < N/2

We assume that the N-gon is in ‘standard position’ centered at the origin with ‘bottom’ edge horizontal. Every star point defines a scale as follows:

scale[k] = star[1][[1]]/star[k][[1]] = (-s/2)/star[k][[1]] (Where star[k][[1]] is the horizontal coordinate of star[k] and s is the side length of N)

Therefore every regular polygon has HalfN star points with star[1] a vertex of N and star[HalfN] known as GenStar[N]. The scales are strictly decreasing with scale[1] = 1 and scale[HalfN] known as GenScale[N].

Example: The 6 star points of N = 14 can be defined using the {14,6} ‘star polygon’ shown here on the left. The second image shows the perfect fit of the First Family. Since this {14,6} star polygon consists of the extended edges of N = 14, it forms the ‘level-1’ singularity set for this ‘star’ region. The third image shows the level-3 web which is based on the {14,6} star polygon, so it can be regarded as a ‘level-3’ {14,6} star polygon. This ‘star’ region is invariant under τ and can serve as a ‘template’ for the global dynamics.

Even though N = 14 has 6 scales, symmetry reduces the ‘essential’ scales to 3, and these 3 are proportional to the 3 scales of N = 7. This is called the TwiceOdd Lemma in First Families of Regular Polygons and it is generic for N and 2N pairs with N odd - so they appear to have conjugate dynamics. Algebraically, this conjugacy is a reflection of the fact that the cyclotomic polynomials Φ_N(X) and Φ_2N(-X) are identical when N is odd.

Because of the conjugacy between N = 14 and N = 7, the local dynamics would be ‘unchanged’ if the origin is shifted from M to D. This is illustrated below with an unmarked origin. If D is at the origin, M is now 5-step relative to D, but the progeny have step sequences which are essentially unchanged. For example on the right is the orbit of DS[3] around M. The period is 14 and the step sequence is constant {32}. Note that the orbit visits D on every third iteration so it is step-3 relative to D. This orbit ‘unfolds’ from a {3,2} to {3} as we pass from M’s world to D’s. In this process the 7 D’s act as one.

Example: The First Family of N = 11 showing the five star points in magenta. Star[5] is GenStar[11] and the corresponding scale is GenScale[11] ≈ 0.0422171162264.

Even though N = 11 does have DS[1] and DS[2] in the correct positions to be M[1] and D[1] – there is no evidence that this chain continues. There is a small M[2] but no matching D[2]. (See the plots at the top of the page.) As indicated earlier, N= 11 is the first ‘quintic’ polynomial and the dynamics are more complex than any polygon studied in depth.

Even for N = 7, the generation issue is far from simple. For all generations M[k] and D[k] are scaled by GenScale[7] relative to the First Family, but the remaining ‘family’ members of each new generation are not always scaled copies of the First Generation. The ‘odd’ generations appear to be perfect scaled copies, but the even generations are slightly different. This may be due to the fact that N = 7 has two non-trivial scales. The situation is worse for other regular N-gons like N = 13 which support chains of families. The subsequent families (aside from M[k] and D[k]) appear to have little resemblance to the First Family.

Our numerical evidence supports the following:

4k+1 Conjecture: Suppose a regular N-gon is in ‘standard position’ with GenStar and GenScale as defined above. If N = 4k+1 for k a positive integer, then there will be infinite sequences of regular N-gons M[j] (the M’s) and regular 2N-gons D[j] (the D’s) converging to GenStar. M[j] will have radius r[M[j]] = GenScale ^j and D[j] will have height h[D[j]] = (1 + GenScale)GenScale ^j for j a non negative integer. The center of M[k] is (1� r[M[j])GenStar and center of D[j] = (1+ h[Dad[j]])GenStar. The periods of these centers have ratios which approach N+1.

We will call polygons of this form 'super-symmetric'. It is easy to show that N = 5 (shown above) satisfies the conjecture, and it may be the only case where the self-similarity begins with the first generation. The heptagon is not super-symmetric but it appears to share some of the properties of the 4k+1 primes - namely the sequences of D’s and M’s along with their families. The even generations appear to satisfy the N + 1 rule. See the table on the side bar. Starting with N = 11, the 4k+3 prime polygons appear to have no canonical family structure past M[2]- there is not even a D[2]. This makes for very complex dynamics.

N = 13 and N = 17 are 'twin' 4k+1 prime polygons and both appear to have the expected strings of D’s and M’s, but the rest of the families show little evidence of self-similarity such as that found with the ‘quadratic’ polygons and N = 7.

From the perspective of number theory, there is an asymmetry between 4k+3 and 4k+ 1 primes. This distinction is a fundamental part of the law of quadratic reciprocity as conjectured by Leonhard Euler and Adrien-Marie Legendre and then proven by Carl Friedrich Gauss. It is an easy matter to show that the set of 4k+3 primes is infinite. However the proof that the 4k+ 1 class is infinite relies on nontrivial results about reciprocity. When Gauss died in 1855, Gustav Dirichlet succeeded him at the university in Gttingen and he used the newly emerging tools of analytic number theory to settle the general question about generating primes from arithmetic progressions. His theorems also imply that the resulting classes have equal distributions, so in the limit there are an ‘equal’ number of 4k + 1 and 4k + 3 primes.

On the left below is the central star region for N = 17, and on the right is an enlargement showing the 7 invariant rings . (For prime polygons the number of invariant rings appears to be Floor[N/2]-1 and the first canonical occupant of the outer ring is DS[Floor[N/2]] which in this case is DS[8] (the center of DS[8] is shown below in green) . Since it is step-8 relative to D, it is a 2N-gon. If this was a 4k+3 prime, Floor[N/2] would be odd and this last occupant would be an N-gon. This shift in dynamics seems to destroy the subsequent family structure, but some of this structure is preserved in the case of N = 7.

Each of these rings (or annuli) have their own dynamics determined by the corresponding step sequences. For N = 17 the steps are bounded above by 9 and below by 1, but steps of size 9 occur only outside of the star region. The allowable steps in each of the inner star rings are given in the table below. Note that the last 5 rings differ only in the distribution of 7's and 8's. If the table says '(6)' it means that 6 only appears as an isolated term so {..,6,6,...}never occurs.

Star Ring	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Steps	1,2,3,4,5,(6)	6,7	7, (8)	7, 8	7, 8	(7), 8	(7) , 8
Typical distribution

Moving outwards, the ring of D’s is constant step-8 and outside this ring, the steps are only 8 and 9. There are endless rings of D’s at equal intervals. Three of these rings can be seen on the left below. The center to center spacing is twice the distance from the origin to D's center, so it is |2*cS[8][[1]]| ≈ 21.58 (where [[1]] signifies the first co-ordinate). These rings of D’s have step sequences which increment by {89}, so the first ring is {8}, then {889}, then {88989}, yielding a limiting sequence of {89} and limiting winding number of 1/2.

In between the rings are invariant regions which have dynamics ‘identical’ to the star region (after rotations are filtered out). That means that the two digits {8,9} code the same information as the 8 digits of the inner star. Each invariant region contains two copies of each annulus from the inner star. Shown below in magenta is the second inner star annulus and its two 'clones' in the region between Ring1 and Ring 2. This region is known collectively as the Ring 1 region. There is one canonical ‘Mom’ and hence one S[1] center in each such region and the P2 projection in the side-bar at left shows the dynamics in Ring 2.

As indicated above, N = 17 may not be a 'typical' 4k+1 prime because it is one of only 5 known Fermat primes (3, 5, 17, 257, 65537). These are primes of the form . It was known since antiquity that 'prime' regular polygons with 3 and 5 sides are constructible, but in 1796, Carl Friedrich Gauss showed that N = 17 is also constructible and five years later he proved that any Fermat prime must be constructible. He also conjectured that these were the only constructible primes and that was later proven to be true.

Gauss published his work in Disquisitiones Arithmeticae in 1801. Gauss systematically developed the theory of modular arithmetic and in the last section of the book, he applied this theory to the task of finding equations for the vertices of regular polygons. He used modular arithmetic to partition the vertices so that they defined nested equations.This is now part of Galois theory where each equation defines a field extension of the previous. With N = 5 shown below in the complex plane, the task is easy. The 4 non-trivial vertices can be grouped into conjugate pairs: s₁= z + z⁴ and s₂= z² + z³ , where z = cos(2π/5) + isin(2π/5). Note that s₁ + s₂ = − 1 and s₁s₂ = − 1 so they are roots of x² + x −1 = 0. The solutions of this equation are ± 1)/2. Since s₁ = 2cos(2π/5) (the complex terms cancel) this must be the positive root, so cos(2π/5) = −1)/4 .

This shows that the regular pentagon is constructible because square roots can be constructed using compass and straightedge. The Greeks could derive this formula for cos(2π/5) from the Pythagorean Theorem, but the method devised by Gauss works for all regular polygons (although only a small portion are constructible). This approach also has implications for solving equations in general. In 1821, a young Norwegian named Neils Able used the results of Gauss and Joseph-Louis Lagrange to show that there is no general formula for the roots of a quintic and a few years later Evariste Gaolis extended these results to polynomial equations in general. (Gauss, Able and Galois made these discoveries before their 20^th birthdays.)

Every regular polygon has its own unique Galois group and all of these groups are abelian and hence soluble– which means that in theory, Gauss’s procedure can always be carried out, but only the Fermat primes will yield nested quadratic equations. For example N= 19 will yield two cubics and one quadratic for a total degree of 18, but the degree of cos(2π/19) will always be half of this.

The vertices of any regular n-gon are the (complex) solutions to Xⁿ = 1. This is called the nth cyclotomic equation. The corresponding polynomial Xⁿ -1 is always divisible by X-1, and for prime n-gons, this is the only divisor, so the minimal cyclotomic polynomial, Φ_n(X), is degree n-1. In general the degree of Φ_n(X) is the Euler totient function φ(n). (This explains why it is common to use the symbol Φ_n(X) for this class of polynomials.)

For the pentagon above there are 5 solutions to the cyclotomic equation. These solutions can be written as z_k = cos(2πk/n) + isin(2πk/n) for k = 0,1,2,3,4. The trivial solution z = 1 is written as z⁵ in the example above to emphasize that all the roots can be found in terms of a single (primitive) root, which in this case is z = cos(2π/5) + isin(2π/5). Because the vertices are defined by a polynomial with rational coefficients, they must be algebraic and not transcendental. This is a little strange since it is common to use trigonometric functions to describe these vertices and ‘most’ trigonometric expressions are not algebraic. In Mathematica, Element[Cos[2*Pi/11],Algebraics] yields True but Element[Cos[2],Algebraics] yields False.

The fact that these vertices are algebraic is of little consolation as the number of vertices increases. By N = 11, the minimal cyclotomic polynomial Φ₁₁(X) is degree 10 and the minimal polynomial for cos(2π/11) is a quintic:

MinimalPolynomial[Cos[2Pi/11]] yields 1+ 6x -12x²-32x³+16x⁴+32x⁵ = 0

This is the first prime polygon which requires a quintic to define the vertices. (Note that sin(2π/11) does not have to be computed independently because the vertices are assumed to lie on the unit circle. This is fortunate because the minimal polynomial for sin(2π/11) is degree 10. This implies that the algebraic recipe for finding the sine is the same as the construction: first find the cosine and then use the quadratic relationship between sine and cosine.) Since the minimal polynomial for cos(2π/7) is a cubic, it would be necesssary to trisect an angle and to construct a regular 7-gon and it would be necessasry to quinsect an angle – that is, divide an arbitraty angle into 5 equal parts - to construct a regular 11-gon.

If we ask Mathematica to simplify or expand the cyclotomic equation for a prime N, it would return algebraic roots for N = 5, but trigonometic values for N = 7 and beyond: ComplexExpand/@Roots[z^5==1,z] yields the qudratic form for the roots of the regular pentagon, but ComplexExpand/@Roots[z^7==1,z] yields trigonometric roots for the regular heptagon. Mathematica can be forced to find these roots in purely algebraic form by solving the corresponding cubic minimal polynomial, but for N = 11 this option does not exist.

Starting with N = 11, there are no practical choices for the vertices of a prime polygon other than trigonometric forms, even though the vertices must have an algebraic form. In Constructions of Regular Polygons we discuss the Galois extensions for N = 11. In terms of the Tangent map, N = 11 is much more complex that N = 7. These are both 4k+3 primes but N = 7 still retains some of the recursive structure found in 4k + 1 primes. None of this structure has been found with N = 11.

Cyclotomic theory can be applied to non-prime regular polygons as well. As indicated above, the minimal degree of the cyclotomic polynomial is always φ(n) where φ(n) is the Euler totient function. The (minimal) degree of cos(2π/n) is always φ(n)/2. When n is prime, φ(n) = n – 1 and in this case the degree of sin(2π/n) is always φ(n).

For n = 6 (shown on the left) , φ(n) = 2, so cos(2π/6) is degree 1 which implies that it is rational (in fact equal to 1/2), while sin(2π/6) is quadratic (/2). For n = 12, φ(n) = 4 and the tables are turned: cos(2π/12) is /2 while sin(2π/12) = 1/2. This shows that the degree of sin(2π/n) is not always φ(n). The formula for the degree of sin(2π/n) can be found in Constructions of Regular Polygons.

As indicated earlier all regular polygons share a predictable large scale structure consisting of concentric rings of ‘Ds’ and these rings guarantee that that the small scale structure is similar at any distance from the origin. For non-regular polygons these rings tend to break down and there is very little that is known about the structure on any scale.

In the table below we summarize what is known about the special cases. Most of these are regular polygons, where we have some knowledge of the dynamics. The only non-regular cases are the Penrose kite, a lattice polygon and a ‘woven’ polygon formed by nesting two regular polygons. The last example is N = 281 which is a 4k+1 prime polygon. For regular N-gons with large N, the dynamics approach that of a circle or ellipse.

For odd N, there is a infinite family of regular 2^kN-gons, and of this family only N and 2N seem to be conjugate. In terms of compass and straightedge constructions, it is trivial to bisect the generating angle of one family member to get the next, but the Tangent map dynamics appear to have little correlation. For example the dynamics of N = 10 and N = 20 are quite different. It is possible that each family may hold surprises dynamically and algebraically. There may also be non-trivial correlations in the dynamics depending on the divisors.

The situation is worse when N is already even. In this case every family member seems to be unique. For example we have found almost no correlation between N = 4, N = 8 and N = 16 . This ‘powers-of-2’ family is almost totally unexplored. How is the simple fractal structure of the regular octagon destroyed when the generating angle is bisected ?

Note: In the recently published First Families of Regular Polygons, there is a Scaling Lemma which shows some hope of relating these diverse families. The Scaling Lemma says that two regular polygons will have related scales when one of a ‘factor’ of the other. This follows because any factor polygon will have star points which are a subset of the star points of the ‘parent’. (Star points are of course relative to the dimensions of the polygon, but they can be defined using a standard height (apothem) of 1 and a lower edge horizontal, so any ‘external factor’ polygon can be assumed to also have a height of 1 and lower edge horizontal, and hence the star points will be comparable – a shown below for N = 24.)

For example, using N = 8 as the external factor, every third star point of N = 24 is a star point of N = 8, so the corresponding scales are related by scale[j] (of N= 8) = scale[3j]/scale[3] (of N = 24). Here scale[3] of N = 24 is what we call ScaleSwap[24,8] = Tan[π/24]/Tan[π/8] = ratio of sides (assuming same height).

In the outer billiards map and other piecewise affine maps, the scaling tends to ‘shadow’ the dynamics, so the Scaling Lemma might provide a link between the dynamics of these families of regular polygons.

We plead with users to ‘adopt’ a polygon or a ‘family’ and share their results with us. The software packages cover the four main cases: Nodd, NTwiceEven, NTwiceOdd and Non-regular but the basic algorithms are the same in all packages. The recent notebook called FirstFamily.nb encompasses all the regular cases.

The posthumous message written on Richard Feynman’s blackboard at Cal Tech was “What I cannot create I do not understand”.

Summary of Results

Below is a summary of dynamics for various polygons. There are more detailed summaries in Pdf format which can be accessed via the Site Map or the PDF folder.The table below sometimes refers to the 'winding number', of an orbit. This is also called the rotation number or the 'twist'. For a given orbit, it measures the mean rotation around M on a scale from 0 to 1, with 1 being a full rotation, so a canonical step-3 periodic orbit for a regular N-gon would have winding number ω = 3/N. It should be clear that for regular polygons, ω is bounded above by 1/2 and bounded below by 1/N.

The first example below is a line segment which is not technically a polygon - but the Tangent map still applies and points diverge uniformly as can be confirmed with a few sketches.

N = 2 (Not a polygon)		• All orbits diverge
N = 3 Regular		• Endless rings of M’s and hexagon Ds. • Ring k has 3k D’s and 12k Ms and these are also the periods if we plot centers of the D’s. Shown here are the 12 M's in ring 1. They map to each other in the order given. • Step sequences of D’s are (1),(211),(21211),etc with limiting sequence (21) so ω→.5 • Non-regular triangles have similar structure.
N = 4 Regular		• 'web' structure is similar to the triangle - but with no distinction between M’s and D’s. • Ring k has 4k Ds and these are also the periods. There is no period doubling. Shown here is the second ring with period 8 and step sequence (2,1) • Step sequences are (1), (21),(221), etc with limiting sequence (2) and ω→.5 • All trapezoids have similar structure.
N = 4 (Penrose Kite)	Below is the level 600 web	• A Penrose Kite has vertices {{0,1},{q,0},{0,-1},{-1,0}}. When q is irrational, R.E. Schwartz has shown that there are unbounded orbits. • The Kite given here has q = − 2. The initial point p is {(1−q)/2 ,1}and it has an unbounded orbit. The first 6 points in that orbit are shown here. Note that they all lie on a lattice of horizontal lines of the form y = k where k is an odd integer. • The points in the orbit of p are woven through the web like thread in a fabric. They form almost perfect Cantor string for the kite. The arrows here point to the threads. Some of the prominent regions are marked with their periods. All of these regions have period doubling , so these are the periods of the centers. • The web is intricate but not fractal - so there is no obvious signs pointing to the complexity. • The winding number (ω) of any unbounded orbit must approach the 'horizon' value of .5. Tracking ω(p) shows considerable local variability on top of the trend toward .5 (Since p is in exact 'radical' form, Mathematica computes its orbit in this same form with no round-off : Τ^500000000(p) ={−5730+ (1−q)/2 −6688q , −4417} ).
N = 5 Regular	The star region below shows the location of a non-periodic point p with orbit dense in the star region.	•First non-trivial star region inside ring of 5 Dads. •Decagon and pentagon periods satisfy: dn = 3dn−1+ 2pn−1 & pn = 6dn−1 + 2pn−1 with d1=5 and p1=10 • dn/dn−1 →6 and decagons are dense so fractal dimension is Ln[6]/Ln[1/GenScale[5]] ≈ 1.241 •The point s = {c5[[1]], c4[[2]]} has a dense non-periodic orbit with ω→ .25. The plot on the left is 50,000 points in this orbit.Note perfect self-similarity. •Bounding D’s have step sequences (2), (322), (32322),..,→(32) with ω→.5
N = 6 Regular		• Domain structure is identical to N = 3 with any hexagon as M and the adjacent triangle as S1. • kth ring of D’s has 6k hexagons and odd rings have decomposition and period doubling. The second ring shown here is period 12 and has no decomposition so the centers are period 12. • D center periods are 3k for odd rings and 6k for even. • Step sequences of D’s are (2),(32),(332),..→(3)
N = 7 Regular	Generation 1 Generation 2 - Portal Generation	• First prime N-gon with multiple scales. It is not super-symmetric but it retains some of the properties of 4k+1 primes, so it is a 'hybrid'. • Odd generations are self-similar. • Even (Portal) generations are self-similar. • Ratios of periods M[k+2]/M[k]→200 which factors as 8 and 25 for transitions from odd to even and back. The value of 8 matches the N+1 rule for super-symmetric primes. • Central star decomposes into two invariant regions – inner with step sequences of 1’s and 2’s and outer with 2’s and 3’s. Step 4 occurs only outside star region. All prime N-gons have similar decomposition. •The interaction between scales becomes more complex with each ‘generation’, and beyond the 5^th generation there are regions (at star[2] and star[3] of D[1]) where the dynamics are no longer predictable. •Bounding D’s have step sequence (3), (334), (33434),..→(34) with limiting ω = .5
N = 8 Regular		•Only octagons – no period doubling •Periods of D[k]/D[k-1] →9 and they are dense so fractal dimension is Ln[9]/Ln[1/GenScale[8]] ≈ 1.246 •Dense non-periodic orbit with ω→.25 •S2 orbit decomposes into two period 4 orbits – each with ω = .25. All S2[k] = D[k] orbits have same ω.
N = 9 Regular	The small rectangle above outlines a portion of the second generation which is shown below. There are 'islands' of chaos amid perfect self-similarity. The region around S2[3] bud is enlarged on the right.	• First generation canonical except that S3 has 12 sides composed of two interwoven hexagons at different radii, and DS[3] has extended edges to form a non-regular hexagon. •M’s and D’s exist on all scales and ratio of periods M[k]/M[k-1]→10 (but not dense). •Second generation is dominated by 'Portal M’s' similar to those of N = 7. In between these Portal M’s are regions with small scale chaos. One of these regions is shown here. •The chaotic region surrounding the S2[3] bud is called the Small Hadron Collider. The gap between the central S2[3] bud and the three octagons is determined by a sequence of (virtual) buds of S2[3] so it is 2r[GenScale[9]^0 + GenScale[9]^1 + ...] where r = rDad·GenScale[9]^4/Scale[1] is the radius of the first bud. (r ≈.000077)
N = 10 Regular	The central star region showing all of the outer ring and half of the inner ring.	• Domain structure is identical to N = 5 but the 10 D’s form two groups of 5 and the 10 S2’s form two groups of 5. This is typical for ‘twice-odds’. • The decomposition of the D’s persists for odd rings a has no effect on the outer star region, but the decomposition of the S2’s creates two invariant inner star regions – one of which is shown here. Together they define the inner star. The 10 pentagon ‘M’s’ patrol the border between the inner and outer stars.
N = 11 Regular		• The second 4k+ 3 prime N-gon • Normal first generation but no evidence of D’s past D[1] or M’s past M[2]. • Second generation shown here has some small M[2]’s on edges of D[1], but no D[2]’s. M[1] is almost devoid of canonical buds. •D[1] and most family members are surrounded by ‘halos’ of complex dynamics as the normal bud-forming process breaks down. •No obvious self-similarity but small invariant ‘islands’ exist on a scale between generations 3 and 4.
N = 12 Regular		•Complex geometry due to the factors of 12, but only one non-trivial scale – which guarantees a fractal structure. •Ratio of periods of D[k]/D[k-1] →27 so the fractal dimension appears to be Ln[27]/Ln[1/GenScale[12]] ≈1.251 •The six-sided S2’s are determined by triplets of virtual D[1]’s, as shown here. •S4 is canonical with buds of size S1. •S3 is non-regular octagon with center at {0, }
N = 13 Regular	Second Generation	•The second ‘super-symmetric’ prime polygon so at GenStar, ratio of periods of D[k+1]/D[k] → 14, and same for M’s. Ratios alternate high and low, so there is some even-odd differentiation. •Dynamics around M[1] are characterized by dense halo of non-canonical buds. There are protected pockets at GenStar and under D[1] for 3rd generation. •There is no obvious self-similarity in the new generations at GenStar– it is possible that each new Generation is distinct.
N= 14 Woven		• A woven N-gon consists of a canonical M at radius 1 and a secondary M at radius between h0 (height of M) and 1 + GenScale[N]. This covers the full range of convex proportions. • Show here is index .95 for N = 7 •Normal ring of 14 D’s is now subdivided - the orbit of the 7 large D’s 'sees' only the canonical N = 7 M tile and the 7 small D’s 'see' only the secondary M. • Star region is no longer invariant. • Rings of D’s undergo periodic oscillations where the D’s grow and then shrink. • Dynamics are very complex. Many orbits diverge rapidly at first and then fluctuate widely in distance.
Lattice Polygons		• A lattice polygon has vertices with integer co-ordinates. The lattice polygon M shown here has vertices {{2,0},{1,-2},{-3,-1},{1,1}} • Any polygon with rational vertices can be re-written as a lattice polygon. • The only regular lattice polygon is N = 4. Every other regular polygon has at least one irrational coordinate so there is no grid size that would make it a lattice polygon. • The orbit of any lattice point will have lattice co-ordinates. Shown here is the orbit of {4,1} which is period 6. This is a period-doubling orbit and the center point of the tile containing {4,1} is {-3,2}. (The tile is not shown here). This is the only point in the tile that is period 3. (Odd periods can only arise in this fashion because tiles are inverted on each iteration – so ‘almost all’ periods are even.)
N = 281 Regular		• This is a 4k+1 prime so there should be chains of M’s and D’s converging to GenStar ≈ {-178.888,-1} (the convention here for M is height 1, not radius 1) • As N increases, the star region grows while the scale shrinks. GenScale[281]≈.000062 so M[1] is microscopic and the local dynamics at GenStar appear to have little effect on the global dynamics- which are dominated by simple rotations about M – like a twist map on the unit circle with minimal perturbations. The amount of twist increases ‘smoothly’ with the distance from the origin. D is S[140] with maximal twist (for the inner star ) at ω = 140/281. • Shown on the middle left is the inner ring which appears to be invariant. Its largest occupant is S[93]. •D is surrounded by the ‘canonical’ outer-star ring which is invariant. Its largest occupant is DS[140] who plays the role of a 'shepherd' satellite. The vertical line from vertex 1 of D (at 3:00) bisects DS[140]. If N was 4k+3, the shepherd would be an odd-step tile. The general formula for the shepherd is DS[Floor[N/2]].

Bibliography

Adler R., Kitchens B., Tresser C., Dynamics of piecewise affine maps of the torus, Watson Research Center, preprint, 1998. cf. MR 2002f:37075

Alperin R.C., A mathematical theory of origami constructions and numbers, New York Journal of Mathematics, Vol 6 (2000), pp 119-133

Alperin R.C., Trisections and totally real origami, American Mathematical Monthly, Vol 112, No. 3 (March 2005), pp 200-2011

Arnold V.I. , Proof of a theorem by A. N .Kolmogorov on the invariance of quasi-periodic motions under small perturbations of the Hamiltonian. - Usp. Mat. Nauk. SSSR 18, no. 5 (1963)

Ashwin P., Elliptical behavior in the sawtooth standard map, Physics Letters A 1997 232:409-416

Ashwin P, Deane J., Fu X-C., Dynamics of a bandpass sigma-delta modulator as a piecewise isometry. Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Sydney Australia,2001:III-811-III-814

Ashwin P., Goetz A. , Polygonal invariant curves for a planar piecewise isometry. Transactions of the AMS, 2006 350:373-390

Ashwin P., Deane J., Fu X-C. , Properties of the invariant disk packing in a model sigma-delta bandpass modulator. International Journal of Bifurcations and Chaos 2003 13:631-641

Ashwin P., Goetz A,. Polygonal invariant curves for a planar piecewise isometry. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 2005 358:373-390

Ashwin P., Goetz A., Invariant curves and explosion of periodic islands in systems of piecewise rotations, SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems 2005; 4: 437.

Ashwin P., Non-smooth invariant circles in digital overflow oscillations. Proceedings of NDE96: 4th International Workshop on Nonlinear Dynamics of Electronic Systems (Seville, Spain), 1996.

Ashwin P, Chambers W, Petrov G, Lossless digital filter overflow oscillations; approximation of invariatn fractals, Internat. J. Bifur. Chaos Appl. Sci. Engrg. 7 (1997), 2603–2610.

Auckly D., Cleveland J., Real origami and impossible paper folding, American Mathematical Monthly, Vol 102, No. 3, (March 1995), pp. 215-226

Baez J.C., Division algebras and quantum theory, arXiv:1101,5690

Baez J. C., The octonions, Bulletin of the American MathematicalSociety, Vol. 39, page 145-2002. Paper and additional bibliography at http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/octonions/

Ball W.W., Coxeter, H.M.S, Mathematical Recreations and Essays, Dover Publications, 1987

Birkhoff G.D, “Dynamical Systems”. AMS Colloquium Publ., Vol 9, AMS, Providence, 1927

Bold B. , Famous Problems of Geometry and How to Solve Them, Dover Publications, 1982

Boyland P, Dual billiards, twist maps, and impact oscillators, Nonlinearity 9 (1996) 1411-1438

Breslin S., DeAngelis, V.,The minimal polynomials of sin(2π/p) and cos(2π/p), Mathematics Magazine, April 2004

Kahng B. , Singularities of two-dimensional invertible piecewise isometric dynamics. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 2009; 19: 023115.

Cassaigne J. Hubert P, and Tabachnikov S, Complexity and growth for polygonal billiards.

Chua L.O.,Lin T. Chaos in digital filters. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems 1988: 35:648-658

Chua L.O.,Lin T. Chaos and fractals from third order digital filters. International Journal of Circuit Theory and Applications, 1990 18:241-255

Chua L.O., Lin T. Fractal pattern of second-order non-linear digital filters: a new symbolic analysis. Int. J. Cir. Theor. Appl. 18 (1990), 541–550. MR1054774 (91d:58149)

Crowe, D.W. , Albrecht Dürer and the regular pentagon, in Fivefold Symmetry by Istvan Hargittai, World Scientific, 1994

Davies A.C. , Nonlinear oscillations and chaos from digital filter overflow. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A- Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences 1995 353:85-99

D. Dolgopyat, B. Fayad, Unbounded orbits for semicircular outer billiard. Ann. Henri Poincare 10 357–375. MR2511890 (2010d:37076)

DogruF. and Tabachnikov S. , Dual billiards, Math Intelligencer vol.27 No. 4 (2005) 18–25

Douady R. , These de 3-eme cycle, Universite de Paris 7, 1982

Dürer, Albrecht, Underweysung der Messung mit dem Zirckel und Richtscheyt, Nuremberg, 1525

Ebert P.M, Mazo J.E., Taylor M.G., Overflow oscillations in digital filters, The Bell System Technical Journal - November 1969

Feely O., Fitzgerald D., Bandpass sigma-delta modulation - an analysis from the perspective of nonlinear dynamics. Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Atlanta, USA,1996 3:146-149

Gauss, Carl Friedrich, Disquisitiones Arithmeticae, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1986 (Translated by Arthur A. Clark, revised by William Waterhouse)

Gauss, Carl Friedrich; Maser, Hermann (translator into German) (1965), Untersuchungen über höhere Arithmetik (Disquisitiones Arithemeticae & other papers on number theory) (Second edition), New York: Chelsea

Genin D., Regular and chaotic dynamics of outer billiards, Penn State Ph.D. thesis (2005)

Genin D. , Research announcement: boundedness of orbits for trapezoidal outer billiards. Electronic Research Announc. Math. Sci. 15 , 71–78. MR2457051 (2009k:37036)

Geretschlager R., Euclidean constructions and the geometry of origami, Mathematics Magazine, 68, No. 5 Dec. 1995 pp357-371

Gleason A. , Angle trisection, the heptagon and the triskaidecagon, American Mathematical Monthly, Vol 95, No. 3 ,1988, pg. 185-194

Goetz A. , Dynamics of piecewise isometries. PhD. Thesis, University of Chicago, 1996. MR2694628

Goetz A. , Dynamics of a piecewise rotation. Discrete and Cont. Dyn. Sys. 4 (1998), 593–608. MR1641165 (2000f:37009)

Goldstein C. Schappacher, N., Schwermer, J. (editors) , The Shaping of Arithemtic after C.F. Gauss’s Disquisitiones Arithmeticae, Springer Verlag, 2007. Pdf available here

Gutkin E, Tabachnikov S. , Complexity of piecewise convex transformations in two dimensions, with applications to polygonal billiards on surfaces of constant curvature. Mosc. Math. J. 6 (2006), 673–701. MR2291158 (2008f:37080)

Gutkin E, and Simanyi N., Dual polygonal billiard and necklace dynamics, Comm. Math. Phys. 143 (1991) 431–450

Gutkin E., Katok, A., Caustics for inner and outer billiards, Commun. Math. Phys. 173,101-133 (1995)

Harper P.G.,Proc. Phys. Soc. , London (1955) A 68, 874

Haug F, Bienert M, Schleich W.P., Motional stability of the quantum kicked rotor: A fidelity approach. Physical Review (2005) A: 71:043803-1- 043803-11

Hooper Patrick, Renormalization of polygon exchange maps arising from corner percolation, arXiv:1105.6137, Feb,2012

Hughes G.H., Henon mapping with Pascal, BYTE, The Small System Journal, Vol 11, No 13. (Dec.1986) 161-178

Hughes G.H., Probing the strange attractors of chaos (A.K. Dewdney), Scientific American, July 1987, pg 110-111

Hughes G.H. ,The Polygons of Albrecht Durer – 1525, arXiv:1205.0080

Hughes G.H. , Outer billiards, digital filters and kicked Hamiltonians, arXiv:1206.5223

Hughes G.H. , Outer Billiards on Regular Polygons, arXiv:1311.6763

Hughes G.H. , First Families of Regular Polygons, arXiv:1311.6763

Jackson L.B, Kaiser J.F., MacDonald H.S. , An approach to the implementation of digital filters, IEEE transactions, Audio and Electro acoustics, AV-16, No 2 (1968) 413-421

Julia G. , Sur l’iteration des fonctions rationnelles, Journal de Math Pure et Appl (1918) 8:47-245

Kean M.,Interval exchange transformations. Mathematische Zeitung 141 (1975), 25–31. MR0357739 (50 #10207)

Kolmogorov  A.N. , Preservation of conditionally periodic movements with small change in the Hamiltonian function,  Doklady Academii Nauk (Report of the Academy of Sciences) SSSR vol. 98 (1954): 527-530.

Kolodziej, The antibilliard outside a polygon, Bull. Polish Acad Sci.Math. 37 (1989) 163–168

Klamkin M.S, Chrestenson H.E., Polygon imbedded in a lattice, Advanced Problems and Solutions, American Mathematical Monthly, Vol 70, No.4, April 1963, pp 447-448

Kunihiko, K, Takahama, T.,Origami for the connoisseur, Japan Publications, Tokyo (1987)

Lapidus M.L., Niemeyer R.G. ,Towards the Koch snowflake fractal billiard. arXiv:0912.3948 – Dec 2009

Lowenstein J.H., Aperiodic orbits of piecewise rational rotations of convex polygons with recursive tiling, Dynamical Systems: An International Journal Volume 22, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 25 - 63

Lowenstein J. H., Kouptsov K. L. and Vivaldi . F, Recursive tiling and geometry of piecewise rotations by π/7, Nonlinearity 17 1–25 MR2039048 (2005)f:37182)

Lowenstein J.H., Poggiaspalla G.,Vivaldi F., Sticky orbits in a kicked oscillator model, Dynamical Systems, Vol 20, No.4 (2005) 413-451

Masur H., Interval exchange transformations and measured foliations. Ann. Math. 115(1982), 169–200. MR0644018 (83e:28012)

Masur H., Hausdorff dimension of the set of nonergodic foliations of a quadratic differential.Duke Math. J. 66(1992), 387–442. MR1167101 (93f:30045)

Masur H., Ergodic theory of translation surfaces. In Handbook of dynamical systems.Vol. 1B, pp. 527–547. Elsevier B. V., Amsterdam, 2006. MR2186247 (2006i:37012)

Masur H , Tabachnikov S. Rational billiards and flat structures. In Handbook of dynamical systems, Vol. 1A, pp. 1015–1089. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2002. MR1928530 (2003j:37002)

Mather J., Action minimizing invariant measures for positive definite Lagrangian systems, Math. Z., 207, 169-207(1991).

Mather J., Variational construction of orbits of twist diffeomorphisms, J. Amer. Math. Soc., 4, 207-263(1991).

Moore F.L., Robinson J.C., Bharucha C.F., Sundaram B, Raizen M.G. Atom optics realization of the quantum delta-kicked rotor. Physical Review Letters 1995 75:4598-4601

Moser J.K., On invariant curves of area-preserving mappings of an annulus, Nachr. Akads. Wiss, Gottingen, Math. Phys., K1, (1962)

Moser J. K., Stable and Random Motions in Dynamical Systems, Ann. of Math. Stud. 77, 1973 (Reprinted as Princeton Landmarks in Mathematics, 2000, Princeton University Press.)

Moser J.K., Is the Solar System Stable ? The Mathematical Intelligencer, (1978) Vol. 1, No. 2: 65-71

Moser J. K., Siegel C.L. Lectures on Celestial Mechanics, Springer-Verlag,(1971) Berlin

Moser J.K., Recent developments in the theory of Hamiltonian systems, SIAM Review Vol 28 No.4, Dec. 1986

Neumann B.H., Sharing ham and eggs, Manchester Mathematics Colloquium, 25 Jan 1959 in Iota, the Manchester University Mathematics students’ journal

Peitgen H.O., Richter P.H. ,The Beauty of Fractals, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 1986

Penofsky, E. The Life and Art of Albrecht Dürer, Princeton University Press, 1943

Pfeifer G., On the confromal mapping of curvilinar angles, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 18 (1917)185-198

Poincare  J.H.,  (1892-99) Les methodes nouvilles de la mechanique celeste,  Paris: Gauthier-Villars

Ribenboim, Paoulo, Algebraic Numbers, Wiley Interscience, 1972

Richmonds H.W., Quarterly Journal of Mathematics, 1893, vol 26, pg. 206

Schwartz R.E. , Outer billiards, quarter turn compositions and polytope exchange transformations. www.math.brown.edu/~res/Papers/PET.pdf, Nov. 28,2011

Schwartz R.E. , Unbounded orbits for outer billiards, Journal of Modern Dynamics 3 (2007)

Schwartz R.E. , Outer billiards on kites, Annals of Mathematics Studies, 171 (2009), Princetom Univeristy Press, ISBN 978-0-691-14249-4

Schwartz R.E., Outer billiards and the pinwheel map. arXiv:1004.3025.

Schwartz R.E., Outer billiards, arithmetic graphs, and the octagon. arXiv:1006.2782.

Schwartz R.E., Obtuse triangular billiards. II. One hundred degrees worth of periodic trajectories. Experiment. Math. 18(2009), 137–171. MR2549685 (2010g:37060)

Schwartz R.E., The Octogonal PETs, AMS monograph, Vol 197, ISBN-978-1-4704-1522-8

Scott A.J., Holmes C.A.,Milburn,G.J. Hamiltonian mappings and circle packing phase spaces. Physica D 155 (2001) 34-50. MR1837203

Siegel C. L. , Iteration of Analytic Functions, Ann of Math (1942) 42: 607-612

Siegel C.L., Lectures on the Geometry of Numbers. Springer, Berlin, 1980. MR1020761 (91d:11070)

Smillie J , Weiss B. ,Veech’s dichotomy and the lattice property. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 28(2008), 1959–1972. MR2465608 (2009m:37092)

Tabachnikov S. , On the dual billiard problem. Adv. Math. 115 (1995), no. 2, 221–249. MR1354670

Tabachnikov S., Billiards. Panoramas et Syntheses, Vol. 1. Societe Mathematique de France, Paris, (1995). MR1328336 (96c:58134)

Tabachnikov S., Geometry and billiards, Student Math. Library, 30. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,RI, 2005. MR2168892 (2006h:51001)

Tabachnikov S., A proof of Culter’s theorem on the existence of periodic orbits in polygonal outer billiards. Geom. Dedicata 129 (2007), 83–87. MR2353984 (2008m:37062)

van der Waerden B.L., Algebra (vol I), Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2003 (from the 7^th edition, originally translated in 1966 from the German text Moderne Algebra (1930-31.)

Veech W. A. , Interval exchange transformations. J. D’Analyse Math. 33 (1978), 222–272. MR0516048 (80e:28034)

Veech W. A., Teichmuller curves in moduli space, Eisenstein series and an application to triangular billiards. Invent. Math. 97(1989), 553–583. MR1005006 (91h:58083a)

Vivaldi F. , Shaidenko A., Global stability of a class of discontinuous dual billiards. Comm. Math. Phys. 110 , 625–640. MR895220 (89c:58067)